Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by bearer_of_truth, Sep 9, 2016.
Don't really know. But surely something would have shown up in man's 5000 year or so of existence.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Why can't you even get that right? Humans have been around much longer than 5000 years.
What do you expect to "show up"? Why do you criticize biology without trying first to learn what it is?
In about 5,000 years you might see some changes in the genome, perhaps some new resistance to disease or something. I doubt you would see any huge morphological changes in that relatively short time. Their habitat hasn't changed a whole lot in that time.
Why the present date is 2016 Because we are in a Christian world, meaning since Christ was born .
For Jews the world is 5787 years old because they are descendant of Adam
But for you Pagans the world is millions of year because you don't know your beginning
Dude, there are trees older than 5787.
(and it's billions, not millions)
No, you are so wrong. The world is only 62 years old - I'm a scientologist.
/* snark off */
So ... you get your knowedge of the world from a calendar?
A calendar made by man?
This is critical analysis for you?
I think you did not understand what I am trying to say .According to the bible the world is very old ,older then 6000 years. according to science ( earth 4.7 billion old ) I don't have any problem wit 4.7 bill. nor very old , nor 6000 years nor 2016 , nor 62 years old. It is matter of how society decides to keep the record .
You as a Jew you know the beginning for you is Adam we are 5777 years since Adam. Do all Jews believe that no.
Did the Roman or the Greeks have a continuous calendar as we have I don't think so
I don't know what you're saying. Why wouldn't you disagree that the world is 62 years old? The world predates society. Many societies had calendars, the Mayans were crazy about them. You can extend any calendar forwards and backwards to infinity, it's an abstract thing.
What kind of weird insult is that supposed to be?
Do you think that all Christians believe that the world was created when Christ was born? If so, how do you explain all the things that the Bible claims happened before Christ? And what about all the many Christians that believe in evolution?
And how do you speak for what all Jewish people believe?
And how is everyone who is not Christian or Jewish "pagan"?
You really just make Christians of your sect look like idiots.
You are a horribly ignorant little man who is trying to demand that the people of the world love things only according to your own ignorance.
Genesis coincides with an important evolution in the human brain. The modern human brain has two centers of consciousness, one is connected to the unconscious mind and the other to the conscious mind. The unconscious center, or primary, is what animals have and controls instincts. The conscious center, often called the ego, is relatively new and allows choices apart from the primary center. When the bible speaks of this new human having free choice, it speaks of the secondary center. It can choose apart from instinct; of God.
Civilization is not natural. Migrating and gathering was the way of the humans, since humans left Africa. For humans to stop this long standing instinctive tradition, so they can form stable civilization, required choices apart from natural instinct; choice appears.
Biology and science confuses the issue, since it judges by the surface, rather than by the core; free will. As an analogy, say apes suddenly begin to think and speak like in the planet of the apes. Human science assumes pre-humans appear about 6 million years ago. But say the apes decide to be more ape-centric and say these were not pre-humans, but part of the ape line, since this is better for their own agenda. They base that conclusion on the preponderance of DNA, not on a small margin of DNA. This shows how subjective this is.
My approach was to look at the claim of religion and ask myself what does science says happened at this same time. At 6000 years ago, the invention of writing appears. The two are connected. The invention of writing stabilized the secondary; In the beginning was the word. Written language changed the human mind and stabilized the secondary.
Picture going to a lecture at school where there are no notes, no writing on the blackboards by the teacher and no books to take home for study. It all has to be done verbally by the teacher; language was already around before writing was invented. First of all you would learn less, since there is no way to review what was said or to highlight what was most important. There will also be debate, after the class, as to what was said. Since there is no way to verify, might or con, can be right. The brain will also forget, over time, because thee is no way to refresh the memory by reading the book again or reviewing notes. The unconscious center eventually takes over and instincts return.
With writing there is an external hard drive that can be used to override the primary center; choice apart from instinct. This external data is carved in stone, cant be erased buy the unconscious, and can be repeated in the exact same way, to create conscious habits.
Civilization had many aborted starts before 6000 years ago. These did not persist. The reason was certain people may have had the skills to make it possible, but without writing, there was no way to pass this on, fully, to the next generation. If Einstein was around before writing, once he died, we may have lost the wisdom he had, since he could not write down his equations. Once writing appears choice and will power becomes firm, and the new part of the brain starts to materialize as a stable secondary; Adam.
The test of the secondary is symbolized by eating of the tree of knowledge. With only a primary, instinct would have avoided this tree. The secondary appears and instinct; paradise, is lost.
Made up crap (and please, demonstrate that "free will" actually exists ).
It's subjective BECAUSE the evidence for the claim is preponderant? That would account for some of your claims and why you think they have any validity...
Oldest known writing: 3400-3200 BC.
1 And that's not even mentioning the slight problem that if "god" does exist (with the claimed attribute of omniscience) then "free will" cannot exist.
You don't seem to know what free will is. All free will is, is the ability to make choices contrary to internal programming; animal instincts. A dog can be trained to make choices apart from their instincts. This is due to humans becoming analogous to an external hard drive, inducing choices that the dog will learn, which can cause him to lose their connection to the instincts. The neurotic dog is often programmed to be so. If he was nurtured by his own instincts from day one in the company of other dogs, these symptoms would not appear. The same was true of the transition humans, which the bible speaks of.
Before I go any further, why is the staff allowing its members to be attacked personally? Is Dywyddyr the bouncer for the staff and is therefore being allowed to attack people at their request?
No, it's not. The line of descendants from Adam (created very shortly after the Earth was created) to Moses (a historical figure) can be traced back through the Bible, and has been; it gives a total age (2600 years for Adam to Moses plus 3400 years Moses to present day) of about 6000 years. You can make some different assumptions for lifetimes, age of childbearing etc but it doesn't change that by more than a factor of 3 or so.
Or, again, you can ignore that part of the Bible.
This is your claim.
What evidence do you have for this?
This too is your claim. And, again, unevidenced.
Pointing out that you haven't supplied evidence, that there's no citations, that you've made serious errors is a "personal attack"?
Oh... and again we have this "at the staff's request" conspiracy theory.
Tell you what: you stop making bullsh*t claims, start providing evidence and/ or citations for your little fantasies, stop making factual errors and I'll stop pointing out that that's what you're doing.
Or do you, somehow and for some reason, consider yourself exempt from supporting your own arguments? If so: why?
Should we accept what you say as being ex cathedra and simply accept it as true?
I see that you've managed (very cleverly - I didn't notice at all) to avoid actually addressing any of my objections. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Question - do these traces account for changes in the calendar (or do they have to? Were there any changes?)
I recall from my high school planetarium shows that the calendar has been changed several ways at various times... but I can't remember enough to know how it changed, how drastically, and when/why.
It's calendar-agnostic. Lineage gives an absolute time, and the time that Moses lived is fairly well known (no matter what calendar you use.)
So your complaint about biology is that it judges biological questions based on what we can discover about the world rather than your specific idea of free will.
This is a poor analogy, since human biologists today identify many "pre-humans" as "pre-apes", given that humans are pretty much a type of ape. Perhaps you mean some specific species of ape rather than apes in general. But there are reasons to declare a species related to one another, not simply subjective whim.
I don't see where he is personally attacking you, he has attacked your ideas and your belief that staff requested him to do this is absurd and a bit paranoid sounding.
Separate names with a comma.